Find a Lawyer

RABNAWAZ versus ABDUR REHMAN

The appeal against the prosecution's testimony from the Section 302/34 Criminal Code (v. 1898), section 417 (2A) Qatil AMd is not credible, because they denied that the mum had a brother but that the prosecution's story Was full of contradictions. The incident was declared invisible because of dishonesty and irrational improvement because the prosecution's witnesses were untrustworthy and after proper consultation and deliberation the matter was settled but each accused was charged with innocence. But after being acquitted, the accused was considered to be innocent twice.

Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2012

• Syed MUHAMMAD ALI SHAH v. Syeda KALSOOM HASSAN 2012 MLD 23
• BAHADER KHAN v. State 2012 PCrLJ 24
• SHAFIQ v. THE STATE through Additional Advocate-General Peshawar 2012 YLR 27
• ISRAFEEL v. State 2012 PLD 27
• MADAD KHAN v. UMAR KHAN 2012 YLR 32
• WAHEED ULLAH KHAN v. KALIM ULLAH 2012 MLD 35
• Mst. SAHIB JANEY BIBI v. DISTRICT POLICE OFFICER, D.I. KHAN 2012 PLD 35
• ABDUL RASHID KHAN v. State 2012 PLD 39

All Peshawar High Court NWFP judgments of 2012 →

inheritance advocates near Kandhkot lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes